If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

None for the "desktop", because there are tons of desktops and none are useable by default. Linus maintains the kernel and does a great job at that, nobody is complaining about the kernel. I don't see competing kernels and massive duplication of effort there.

Excuse me, are you fucking retarded? How are Unity, KDE, Gnome3, XFCE, IceWM, Awesome, LXDE duplicating anything? They are completely different projects with complete different goals and views. And user-friendly are usable out of the box, developer friendly are expecting developer to customize them to their needs by reading documentation. Just shutup!

Originally Posted by arokh

Broken, desperate need for rewrite, dinosaur, who cares.

Another proof that you are fucking retarded.
There is difference between truck and train, no? Fucking yes. Different transport ways call for different paradigms.
On modern hardware, the network transparent Xorg is inefficient, because no one has supermachine with 1000 thin graphical terminals at home anymore. These "features" are not used, but are required for graphical throughput, resulting in excessive complexity, loss of performance and degraded coding/debugging transparency.
Xorg is in no freaking way is going to be abadoned or broken.
The road map is either to finish Wayland and then implement Wayland over network or rewrite Xorg from scratch specifically to match needs of datacenters with multiple thin clients to "as needed" degree.

Originally Posted by arokh

Nobody is mixing Ubuntu with Linux. Yes it's their decision and they are a corporation with business needs and will surely maintain Mir in the future. In that case perhaps the Wayland devs should abandon their project and help make Mir a good solution.

Ubuntu decided to write own display server. The only two reasons why Ubuntu got under crossfire is NOT because they duplicate anything. It is THEIR money and THEIR decision.
They got criticized only because they have listed many Wayland shortcommings that are false statements because they actually do not know Wayland. That was cleared by them.
Which resulted in another criticism vector, they rewrite simply because they want full control over it even though they have not been hindered to change and upstream anything they change, which is always seen as stupid thing to do.
Are we clear now?

Originally Posted by arokh

What's your argument here? You feel the year of Linux desktop was 2003 and that means I should crawl out of my hole? I don't get it. I started using Linux around 1997-1998 with Redhat 5.x and Slackware 3.x. The year of Linux desktop has never come, crawl out of your hole.

If you did start in 1997, then you would not bullshit me with such claims! In 2003 Linux was enough powerfull with Nvidia graphics card and HP all-in-ones to do absolutely everything.
That was the year of Linux desktop for me, because I booted into it and never booted back into windows since then. Never.

Originally Posted by arokh

Mostly they are. Ever worked at a software company?

I know a frigging 80 year old salesman, COMPLETE NOOB when it comes to computers, who works in technical area who uses Linux for EVERYTHING. Is he nerd?

Originally Posted by arokh

Yes you do fail, because I have no idea where you are going with this.

Oh shut up - what is "MVP"?

Originally Posted by arokh

HAHAHAHAHAHA. Is my response to that. Try that going from Ubuntu, then to Fedora, then to SUSE will ya? Or even between versions of the same distro. Anyways, you quoted me and started talking about something completely different again.

Fine, lets unroll the quote for the blind:

Originally Posted by arokh

Originally Posted by brosis

Originally Posted by arokh

You need someone rational at the top to tell the nerds what they should code, not the other way around. I always laugh when I see people arguing that the Linux desktop is better than Windows/Mac, and has reached maturity. We all know these people spend hours setting up their desktop, installing binary drivers, desktop extensions, custom launcher docks, etc. and when they are finally done it looks kinda like a Mac except it's just a polished turd.

You can transfer your ~ with you. So its one-time life-time setup.

HAHAHAHAHAHA. Is my response to that. Try that going from Ubuntu, then to Fedora, then to SUSE will ya? Or even between versions of the same distro. Anyways, you quoted me and started talking about something completely different again.

I havent and going from Ubuntu to Fedora to whatever will work FINE.
I also were not talking about "something completely different". So suggestion - how about you shut up?

Originally Posted by arokh

Functioning binary package management? Spending less time downloading??? What planet do you live on? Seriously... Using Linux since 2003 didn't do you much good. Binary packages are not installable across different versions of the same distribution and certainly not between different distributions. Ever heard of Linux dependancy hell? We've been living in it since the start. Anyone running a modern Linux distribution have hundreds of meg's worth of updates weekly if not daily, even if the updates concern parts of the system that you will never even touch.

Are you fucking retarded?! Binary packages work FINE across different versions of same or whatever distribution, because each distribution has own binary repository that no one ever cares about because its automatic.
No, I haven't heard of Linux dependency hell, but I know about DLL hell and newer version WinSUCKS (WinSxS) which grows beyond 100GiB very rapidly due to each application being installed with own dynamic libraries in seperate containers.
Also, you once more point out you should shut the fuck up because amount of updates one gets depends solely on software choice and distribution policy - whether its rapidly updating or not; whether its bleeding edge or stable.
If you join microshaft developer channel, you winblows beta is updated no less frequent as for example, debian sid. But one difference again - one can PIN the packages and prevent any updates without breaking anything.

Originally Posted by arokh

Don't confuse Linux (awesome kernel) with random open source hackers hobby projects. Yes it offers tons of desktop environments and configuration possibilities. Too bad all of them are crap! Microsoft and Apple have fulltime employees doing research on UI design and usability and it shows. Instead of imitating them, keeping the best stuff and improving on the not so good stuff, GNOME and KDE devs think they can do better. Wrong!

How fucking much have both MacOS and windows reinvented the wheel? What about microsoft bob?

Originally Posted by arokh

Exactly, because their default environment works great and they can focus on using the computer for it's real purpose instead of wasting their time on broken desktop environments. Users and devs should be forced, only then would we get progress. Obviously that ain't gonna happen because most "Desktop" devs work in their spare time and work on what they feel like. And if they feel taskbar is not working, it's gone. If they feel like spatial window mode is great (remember that?) then that's what we get.

Oh fuck no, not because it works great - but because they have no choice but get used to it. And you are NOT forced, if you want stable software, use STABLE DISTRIBUTION. They have XFCE 4.6 right now in Debian Stable, very old, but completely stable.

Originally Posted by arokh

Errrr. You're a double-turd then, how about that? Great discussing with you.

Nope - a turd is matter that constantly spreads decaying odor regardless of environiment for no apparent reason except its own nature, it matches you perfectly.
I am a turd cleaner and you are wiped once again.

Java? Faster than C#? Nice joke man. You'd need some very special cases where Java beats C#. I did my benchmarks and tests. Also Java GUIs just look ugly. And yes there are multiple Java IDEs and the best I found was NetBeans, which is kinda good but slow when loading bigger projects (they may have fixed that in the meantime). Also Java is owned by Oracle...and we're all seeing what's happening to MySQL. Java won't be around for long.

I think he's referring to http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/ and that's actually something I've been curious about, how do Mono and .NET compare speed wise? On the Java issue I do wish that Microsoft would finally finish putting everything under Apache, because that would finally give the killing blow to Java... Oracle throttling it to death is taking far too long.

Originally Posted by Detructor

well in that case, you didn't do a good job. I developed 4 in-house applications in C# that worked on Mono without even having Mono in mind for it. I'm also currently developing a rather big/complex program that'll be available for Linux (because I need it for myself, too), there may be driver related problems in the future but as of now I didn't encounter any problems.

To add on top of this if he's having issues with C++11(assuming the issue isn't C++11 being not fully supported in compilers yet) then either he hasn't learned the Qt4 dance (I guess it would be Qt5 dance now) or he's doing it wrong for trying to write cross-platform.

Originally Posted by Detructor

About C++: Well last time I checked you needed to fumble around with header files (I still don't understand what those are for), pointers and there was not one IDE that has C++ + GUI builder the way C# has it. Instead you needed to do manual binding and stuff you really shouldn't even think about. Also I read a few times that compilers tend to 'optimize' your code which results in unexpected behaviour. Aaand last one: There seems to be no debugger that is as easy as VisualStudio's debugger (build-in in an IDE and easy to use)

Header files are a further Interface|Implementation split and helps make individual classes more of a black box than having the implementation shoved into the interface of the class, and this can be taken even further with the concept of the d->pointer. Which is a private class that is providing the underlying implementation for the public class, which helps to maintain ABI compatibility. Also it allows for linking to different libraries for updates and such... Essentially the header file is being compiled into the actual code and then the .cpp is being compiled and linked to the application binary providing an implementation for said compiled in header.

As far as a GUI builder goes take a look at Qt Creator, and as far as the optimization issue that is true for pretty much any language, and even moreso for a managed language like C# or Java, because part of the whole argument for JITing is that it can optimize for the architecture it's being run on at runtime and improve the optimization over the long term. In terms of debugging Clang gives nice compile time debugging and then Qt Creator hooks into Valgrind for it's debugging stuff, I haven't played enough yet with Visual studio to say whether one debugger is better than the other in that regard, however it is integrated.

I havent and going from Ubuntu to Fedora to whatever will work FINE.
I also were not talking about "something completely different". So suggestion - how about you shut up?

I have done keeping ~ between Fedora and openSUSE and I can say that Fedora->openSUSE and openSUSE->Fedora works just fine, as well as maintaining ~ while going up in versions. Infact either of those -> Slackware works fine too although the transition back isn't so clean as you have to Chown everything when you want to use it with another Distro.

It's becoming clear to me I'm discussing with a child. Come back once you've grown up, moved out from your nerdcave and had some real world experience with computers will you?

The Linux desktop have always been and still is a trainwreck. Even the devs are realizing it and they are either abandoning ship or trying to fix things by creating more fragmentation as usual. Too bad UnitedLinux failed, they were on the right path until SCO went insane.

The Linux desktop have always been and still is a trainwreck. Even the devs are realizing it and they are either abandoning ship or trying to fix things by creating more fragmentation as usual. Too bad UnitedLinux failed, they were on the right path until SCO went insane.

I tend to agree with your comments but I think instead of unity what we really need is one group to take in their own efforts and make their own Operating Environment and forget about the "community". Kind of like what Google does with Android. What we have on the desktop is a bunch of completely disparate parts developed by a variety of people for a variety of needs with a variety of visions and tastes and then a distro just throws them all together, hoping that it meets the needs of the users. And so we have a bunch of different distros but in essence they are all the same hodge-podge of mediocre choices with a little polish thrown in to differentiate.

Instead what you need is a company large enough to design an OE from end-to-end and re-use existing pieces where possible (Linux kernel, some common GNU tools, etc.). And, like Microsoft, Apple, and Google, this company has to depend on consumer sales to drive profits. In other words, make a turd and you get $0. (This is the opposite of the GNOME mentality... where they can force their "vision" on the product, no matter how batshit insane it is, because they don't have to answer to customers at all.)

Now unfortunately there aren't too many companies that have the resources to do this. It's kind of like trying to make a car company to go up against Ford and GM -- the latter have years and years of accumulated experience. But what we do know is that the current distros are kind of wallowing around in the same nerdiocrity year after year after year without really making any inroads in terms of marketshare, and what's baffling is that people in these efforts still can't figure out why.

So I completely reject the idea of a "Linux desktop", just as a "Linux mobile" would likewise be a failure. We need a desktop OE that has Linux at its core and that's about it. Whether it be Ubuntu or ChromeOS or Android or whatever, this focus on commonality and having a "community project" is just a waste of time because it doesn't reflect reality. Creating a good desktop OS requires a ton of focus and concerted effort and, yes, hierarchy.

What? It's irrelevant if he used mouse & keyboard on a touch interface? It's like trying to skateboard in high heels.

Yes it's irrelevant, because touch is only useful for tablets/smartphones or other things with <=12" screens. And touch input is no good for any prolonged, serious work where you have to interact with a GUI. Touch on larger screened devices (not to mention multi-monitor setups) is ergonomically inferior, ergo: any OS that relies on touch to be usable is a failure.

Windows 8 is designed for both touch screens and classic setup. They unified their platform, devs will be able to develop once and run "everywhere". Don't blame your ignorance on MS.

Hahaha, are you reciting some kind of MS propaganda PR text? Get the fuck out of here...

This unified platform nonsense is... well, nonsense. It's not working for MS, their phone OS is tanking even though they butchered Nokia for it (4% market share and dropping) and no one wants to use windows ache - its sales figures are abysmal.

For that matter - the "develop once, run everywhere" is bullshit. Windows ache, windows phony and windows Reeking Turd (RT for short) are not mutually compatible. Even in cases where they are, the developers will still have to adapt the interface for different types of devices and different input methods.

The reality of the situation is, that the same interface for desktops, laptops, tablets and phones is a moronic idea, they are different platforms and different things work for them. Trying to use the same interface for such drastically different platforms is idiocy, and MS is paying the price for their failure.

I'm not a Windows user myself, just had a quick look at Windows 8 but it does look promising.

So you're just engaging in anal ventriloquism, then. Or in layman's terms, talking out of your arse.

I don't know where you get from that it's a disaster/failure, do a google search for windows 8 reviews, most of them are overly positive.

Where I get it? Have you been living in a subterranean barrel for the last year? How about:
- windows ache sales figures are horrible. This has been all over the news. The sales are only a fraction of what windows 7 sales were when it had been released for the same amount of time. http://www.techieapps.com/windows-8-...ing-pc-makers/
- the sales figures were so horrible microsoft decided to try pulling a fast one: they claimed "oh hey, we didn't REALLY release it when we said we did (and started selling it with a huge, multi-billion dollar marketing campaign), the REAL release is now". They also tried shifting blame to the OEM's... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/01..._8_blame_game/
- most sources that aren't paid MS shills are calling windows ache a piece of shit. Notably, the usability guru Jakob Nielsen has bashed it to all hell, and he's not a windows hater, he usually likes ms products. http://www.nngroup.com/articles/wind...ing-usability/

That enough or do you need more?

You got it backwards, Unity is a disaster agreed upon by everyone. Canonical wants to do the same thing as MS though, unify their desktop/tablet/phone experience etc. Problem is that the rest of the Linux distributions aren't going to follow, so more fragmentation is incoming.

Unity is liked by many and hated by many. It's not the best interface, has many flaws, but at least it's usable. Heck, I used it for almost a year with no problems, it's actually quite nice for trivial day-to-day use when you get used to it, it's only in power use that it's limitations start to show. Of course there are better desktops out there, and that's the great thing about Linux - something doesn't work for you, there are alternatives. How many different desktop environments can you install on windows 8? Oh right, none.

Canonical is doing shitty things, yes - of that we can agree and that's not the issue at hand here. I hope they'll come to their senses at some point and drop all those marketing-speaking suit-zombies that keep steering them shitwards.